Letter: Demythologising the 'Glorious Revolution'

Click to follow
The Independent Online
Sir: Aidan Langley (letter, 30 December) is also, I suggest, not telling us the whole truth about the forced removal of James II. Parliament was not sitting, nor is there recorded any consultation of the people at the time that might have given authority to the French ambassador's statement that 'the majority of the population supported the change'. The truth of the statement is even more dubious if 'change' meant the invader becoming king.

The invitation to William was signed by only seven people, who were supported probably by self- interested City influence.

Even Sarah Churchill - later Duchess of Marlborough - who was well-placed and well-informed, wrote:

I was so simple a creature that I never once dreamt of his (William) being King . . . I imagined that the Prince of Orange's sole design was to provide for the safety of his own country by obliging King James to keep the law of ours and that he would go back as soon as he had made us all happy . . .

Yours faithfully,

ANTHONY GRIFFIN

Geddington,

Northamptonshire

30 December

Comments